tv Road to the White House CSPAN December 16, 2012 9:30pm-11:00pm EST
what did it mean when you were sitting there one that wall came down? when was it? >> 1989. people have forgotten how much fun it was. it was a very exhilarating time in history, but they have also forgotten how nervous people were. i remember sitting on the wall, and it was 4:00 in the morning, and everyone was awake, but there were hundreds of people sitting on top of the berlin wall, and there was a wall and then no man's land. they were standing there very nervous. at 4:00 in the morning everyone has drunk champagne, and they have already some the national anthem, so what you do next seven? people started to jump off the walls, and the guards would rush
over and throw people back. it was not entirely as satisfying moment. i discovered as we were sitting there that east german politburo was trying to decide what to do about these people sitting on the wall and should they start shooting? it could have ended differently. >> i am going to run an interview with your husband. his name is? >> roddick. >> you have been defense minister for how long? >> six weeks. >> prior to that you have been living in the state's for several years. >> three years. i have been with the ministry before i was a deputy. >> here in washington you are known as mr. anne applebaum.
>> i am proud to be married to anne. >> seven years ago. >> he looks so young. >> does he look that young today? >> he looks wonderful. >> what does that mean that he is now a minister of poland? how does that figure into your interested? >> it does not figure in directly. i have a background in knowledge i would not have otherwise. he does not influence me in a direct way. he is not sitting with me in the archives while i am looking of what happened to the hon. film director in 1947, -- while i am looking at what happened to the hungarian film director in 1947. having this connection gives me some empathy and what happened there. >> what are the residuals from two today in i
eastern europe? anything? >> one of the things that happened since 1989 is the region we used to call eastern europe has become very differentiated. these countries no longer have anything in common with one another, except a common memory of communist occupation. poland is as different as greece is from some land. europe is now divided in many ways to -. there are a few elements of the communist past you can see. there is a paranoid element in politics that comes from the legacy of people being spied on and having lived in an oppressive system. they are more paranoid about secret deals behind their backs, because secret deals were done behind their backs, and that is understandable. there is an anxiety about being left behind in the west.
the memory of the past continues to play out, but in truth, these countries are more different from one another than they are similar. >> you through -- you chose three of eight countries behind the iron curtain? >> it depends on how you count. >> what were the three democrats i chose to poland, hungary, and east germany. they have different historical background. they belong to different empires in the 19th century. they have different political traditions and mostly because they have given experiences of the war. germany was nazi germany. poland resisted very strongly. the nazis had one of the most resistant movements in europe. the hon variants were different. hungarians- the were different. i was interested in how did they
react and the subsequent process of sovietization. >> how would you describe the situation in the country's today, the lifestyle, the economy, the openness to democracy and all that? >> all of them are democracies. east germany is not east germany. it is part of germany, so it is indistinguishable. west germany is poorer in some ways than poland, a country that has recovered more vigorously than the eastern part of germany. poland is a very vibrant democracy, maybe to vibrant -- too vibrant, but it plays a very important and central role in europe. it is a member of nato. it is the largest of the former east european countries.
it has a larger role in that region than anybody else. hungary is still a democracy, and it is a liberal capitalist states. it has been badly governed and the last 20 years, and if this bill in many ways -- there are institutionshungarian that have not been reformed much. there is a far right in hungary. there is an unattractive and left as well. it is a less happy and less stable state, but it is still a democracy and still a very open society. >> at what point in your research did you say i did not know that? >> constantly. i was constantly running into -- one of the things that happens when you read archives, when you read communist archives, you discover behind closed doors of the communist officials are much more open than they are in a
public common region than they are in public, so they are always saying -- communist officials are much more open than they are in public. they were not just mouthing slogans. they believe a proletarian revolution was coming and if we just do the right things we will be able to create its, and they are constantly surprised by what goes wrong. it is supposed to happen this way. the peasants and workers are supposed to support us, but they do not. they argue we need more ideology or more of this and more of that. they discover they are not producing as much as they need to. they are always looking for ways -- they have the evidence. they know what has gone wrong, and they cannot figure out how
to fix it. >> how do the leaders live compared to the proletariat? >> the leaders lived in isolated communities. they were cut off from the rest of society. now they have access to privileges that may not seem so extraordinary to us, but at that time they had indoor plumbing and access to all kinds of food at a time there were great shortages, so the leaders were very isolated, very protected, often surrounded by servants, maids, employees of the states and the interior ministry, said they were protected at all times, and they were nervous about making public appearances. they were anxious. >> how did that track with the idea everybody should be equal?
likes it is an interesting question. all the pigs are equal, and some are more equal than others. this developed in the course of the revolution. they thought we were working hard. if they were asked to justify we would have said, we are working hard on behalf of the state. we are the avaunt guard. we will leave -- we will lead the proletariat into the full state of communism. we are not there yet, and until we have reached a full state of communism we have to have temporary inequalities. that would be the justification. what went through their heads, one does not want to know. >> how did you do with translation? how much did you do yourself? >> i.s.p. polish and read polish fluently -- i speak polish and three polish fluidly. i read and speak russian. in hungarian i have translators.
they were people who had worked in archives before and did a lot of translations. but i literally went around with them, so we would go to the main federal archives, sit in the back, open the document, and she would start whispering in my ear, and everyone would go sh! i talked by way through these things. we read books together. they of course translated interviews for me. that was how i it -- how i dealt with that problem. one of the reasons there are so few books like mine is because historians feel awkward about using translators. you do not give regional portraits. there are many books about poland and east germany written
in those languages and in english, but there are few who tried to do a wider range, and what i wanted to do was establish patterns, what was happening at different times, and i felt i could only do that by doing several countries. >> you mentioned about the russian archives being open for a short time. why did they open, and who shot them? >> the archives were opened in the 1990 costs at a time when the russians were in the wake of the union. there was a movement to end secrecy and discussed the past. this came from the ground up, and people at the top supported it. the archives began to open in the 1990's and in some ways were extraordinarily successful. archives began to open for
western scholars. i worked a lot in russia during the 1990's, and i began to have the impression one of the other reasons they were open is because russians were so preoccupied with other things they did not care. as a young american woman, how could you beat walking around those archives? the idea was, she wants to look at those documents, so what? we are busy reforming our country. in 2002 and became president of russia, -- in 2000 putin became president of russia, and he became conscious of what history was told and how it was being told, and this trickle-down. he became more wary about what archives were opened and who had access to information. they are not totally closed, and
you can still work in them. some of them become difficult, particularly the military archives. >> w bush came into the presidency. he made it difficult to get some for you could get access to his father. what is the difference between that attitude and what you have in these countries? is it a matter of degree, or do we have a different attitude? >> we believe in principle it should be open, and we argue around the edges of what is still classified and how long should it be classified and when will historians have access to it now? the soviet union assumed all of it was closed and nobody would ever have access. what worries we are returning to that kind of attitude. it is not just let's wait until everybody is dead and then we
can talk about it, but nobody is ever going to have access to it. it is secret, and the truth does not get out. >> why do they keep it there if they are never going to let it out? >> the kgb writes its own books. in writes its own histories -- should say, wrote its own descriptions and kept them inside its building. they are interested in their own history. >> how do we deal with the world of openness when it comes to archives? but the u.s. is better than many european countries. many u.s. archives are easier to use. cia archives are harder to use the avaya and i would argue they could be more open, particularly older ones. that can all be done, but the
national archives and -- i actually have not worked in it, but friends i know is easy. >> go back to when you started this book in 1944, and it goes to 1956. how did the soviets take over eastern europe? what did they use? you mentioned a lot of stuff earlier, but give us some examples. >> there were three or four institutions they considered important. if you look at the world in 1945, stalin did not have plans. he did not have a 10-point plan. he was an opportunist and a tactician. he had a conviction sooner or later these would become communist countries, because
marx's ideology said so. it said there will be international revolutions and the soviet union will bring these revolutions to the countries. he had a conviction it would happen but not a lot of uncertainty about -- a lot of certainty about when. what he did to make sure he had enough influence -- i will choose three institutions in particular he thought were important. number one was the secret police. he created a secret police forces speaking the local languages, sometimes from the soviet union, and began training them, and they began doing that right away. they begin in 1939, and they began creating a polish secret police force and then, and they
began importing them when they began chasing the germans out of poland. that is number one, and that institution is used in turn to target people, so the soviet union does not use mass violence. you did not see mass murder. what they begin to do is they look for potential opponents, and this can be church leaders. it can be resistance leaders. the first encounters between the red army and the polish resistance army -- violence -- are very violent. the red army arrested them and send them to labor camps, and this may sound paradoxical, but it was because they plan from
the beginning to eliminate or suppress leadership of these countries, potential leaders, and this was the home army. the second institution, they set up oppressive organs. the other institution they were obsessed with was radio. they were interested in radio because they thought of the radio as the most effective means of reaching the masses, reaching the workers. >> no television at the time? >> there was no television at the time. there was television they get later. television essentially serves a similar function. everywhere they go one of the first things they do is takeover or create new radio stations. in central berlin they occupy
the nazi radio station a immediately. as soon as they get there they protected from harm. some of the communists are sent to work on the radio station. that is how important they consider it to be. in poland they create a radio station from scratch. they believe in the efficacy of their own propaganda. once we began to explain to people what they want, they will go along with us, and the radio is going to be the means by which to do this, so they care a normal soleil -- they care a enormously. the third thing, another thing they do very early before they eliminate political opposition, and before they have nationalize , they began tomo
target youth groups, and other kinds of women's groups, charitable organizations, church organizations. these are the groups they want to put under state control. they do not want any institutions of the kind to come into existence. >> let me ask you about the ymca in poland. >> they did have a building in warsaw. it was one of the few buildings to exist. very soon after the war people began to move into it. they have resources from outside. they were able to do things like bring in clothings and from the west and to feed people and set up soup kitchens. because of a shipment of jazz
records that arrived at the ymca, it became the center of social life, and it was a place you went to go to parties in 1947 and 1948. you imagine a city where everything is rubble and there is almost nothing standing. the ymca, this poses such a threat and such a problem that at the highest level the communist leaders right to one another, we must do something. we must destroy the ymca. they close it up, and in a tragic moment, the communist youth group is sending to smash it, because anything that is a spontaneous organization is seen as a potential threat to the regime. >> of one. you mentioned -- at one point you mentioned sartre and p
icasso. what role did they play? >> sartre was a philosopher of the time. picasso was one of the great modernist painters. at one time they were either communist or communist sympathizers. both of them were seen as a justification. if even people like picasso end were communists, it was ok for other people. picasso was taken to see a new apartment block was being built in the city, of homes for the workers project, which was seen as a sign for progressive
architecture, and he painted a picture of one of these new apartments, which later became a many tourist attraction -- mini tours attraction. they became annoyed by the amount of people who knocked on the door to see the sketch on the wall, survey painted on it. >> if you were going to send people to a number of places today in eastern europe but would somehow -- that would somehow reflect those years, what would you sing? >> i would send you to warsaw. you can do a visual archaeology. you can see what was killed when, and there were a number of prominent stalinist and buildings in the center of warsaw, including the palace of which was a skyscraper
built in the high architectural style, and you get an idea of what it looks like aesthetically. >> we talked about it earlier -- the jews of europe. how many have moved back into either eastern germany or poland or hungary? >> i am not going to remember off the top of my head the numbers. you have them in the book. >> the reason i ask is if many of the jews have moved back. >> many thousands have moved back. many thousands have survived. they were in disguise. they survived the war. more survive in hungary than is generally known, particularly in the city of budapest. the attack on hon. jews happen later in the war. effectively, -- the attack on hungarian jews happen later in
the war. a large community survive in budapest, a couple hundred , which is a significant number. in poland they survive in all kinds of ways. many survive are going to the soviet union. many came home to find what was left. one very sad and moving archival document said many come home just to see the cemeteries and then leave because they do not want to be there anymore. jews to come back. some try to make new lives there. some joined the communist party. the communist party has an attraction not just for jews, but for anybody who experience the devastation of the war and the shattering of morality the war brought. many people did see in communism a kind of alternatives. maybe this system will work.
liberal democracy did not work. the west did not come to our aid. maybe there is some alternative. there was a brief time when people were listening to the radio station, and it was attractive for jews who had nothing else that were excluded from all kinds of politics not only in the war but before. they come back. it is a strange and hard story to tell because some joined the communist party, and some immediately come into conflict with the communist party because many were small merchants, and they were subject to the nationalization and takeover of this period and begin to leave, and large groups begin to leave for israel in the late 1940's, some with a complicated story -- some leave with aid of those countries.
there are a couple of moments when they helped train and jews -- train jews. >> you write about -- at one point the two words mickey and mouse come out. what is that about? >> i was describing the origins of a famous song. there is a song called the song of the party. the lyrics go the party is right. while i went to look for somebody singing a song, i found a number of parody's, including mickey mouse singing it. this became a song in later years people would make fun of. what interested me is you can make fun of it now, but people
were seeing it 30 years ago in berlin or 40 years ago in berlin. why did they sing it? this was the introduction to my chapter of what i described as reluctant contribution. >> is in german. here is some of the language here. wherever she was, there is life. we are what we are because of her. she never abandoned us. now she is always right. >> it is hard to know what people believe. some would like to believe it or would hope to believe it. some people felt they have to believe it, and some people felt it was ok even if you did not believe it because it was a
he is standing next to the president of east germany. i saw mai, castro, stalin. >> what started to break up the control of the soviets? >> it is very important to look at this period when you ask that. the soviet union contains the seeds of its own destruction. many of the problems we saw at the end begin at the very beginning. i spoke already about the attempt to control all institutions and all parts of the economy and political and social life. when you do that, you create opposition and potential dissonance everywhere. if you tell all artists they have to paint the same way, and one says i do not want to, you
have just made him into somebody who might otherwise have been a political -- a-political. if you tell boy scouts they have to be young pioneers, and one group decides they do not like that, so they form a secret underground group, you have just created another group of political opponents. the system created posset -- pockets of resistance. just as important, the other element you can see from the beginning is the gap that is growing between the ideologue the rigid ideology -- between the ideology.
bit does not happen that way. it happens but not really. or there is some growth but the west is growing faster. the fact that the system is never a return -- able to fulfill its promises is by it -- means by the end, even have the people leading it do not believe it anymore. the loss of faith in the system, which begins in the 1940's and grows worse and worse, means that there is nobody left to defend it. not even soviet leadership at the various -- very highest oncel was able to extend, lunc the conversation was begun about history and what is really wrong. as soon as people did not have to collaborate anymore, they did not obligated to go along with what the party wanted and to sing the song that the party is
always right, and they stopped. >> after the wall came down, we did a 30-hour special. i remember interviewing a man who was one of those who started the revolution. he turns out to be a member of the stasi. he ratted on his own family and ended up moving. i am not sure he is still alive. what kind of mentality is it? he held the revolution began back to freedom but he was a member of the secret police in east germany. >> it is incredibly complicated. more so than we in the u.s. would like to think. people were not often have one
thing or another. many peoples zigzag throughout their zero lives -- throughout their lives. they are telling jokes behind the back of the party, or hiding somebody who might be imprisoned. people tried to find a path they felt was moral and right. in a time when the state controlled everything, this is very difficult. it often helps to think about if you have children, would you be willing to say, i will not march in the parade, i will not do all of these things, if you know it means your child will be expelled from school and will not be able to study and will not have a future and will not be educated? these are dramatic, radical choices people make.
they had to give up things it would never occur to us to give up in order to make a political point. it is more drastic, although even then, there were degrees. there were people who thought they would inform a little bit and not say anything important and i will do with so i can protect my wife who is ill and needs to get medicine from the hospital perry if i do this, i will get medicine for her and she will not die. even then, sometimes, the choices were much more gray and complicated than we now imagine sitting here in a free society. >> what is the difference between all the favoritism back then to the people of party and what goes on in this town when you are in power and we have earmarks? pick your moment. people in power here dish out
favors to people based on whether or not you follow the party. >> the difference is there is no threat of violence behind it. that is one difference. if you do not vote for the republican party or the democratic party, you do not go to jail or you are not going to be arrested and your child will not be expelled from school. there is really a dramatic difference between the consequences and the radical nature of choices people had to make. the second difference is that our system is more or less open. we know what stuff goes on. we can have an artist -- an argument about it and discuss it. the -- they were entirely closed. you did not necessarily know what is going on. >> are there any lessons in your book for the people who live in
china? there is not the openness. what would you say about the chinese leaders about their future? >> the chinese leaders have drawn lessons from these stories. the chinese leaders know this piece of history, and there is a similar time in their own history, and they also have studied very carefully the 1980's. one of the decisions they have made based on setting this piece of history is that they have made contemporary china last totalitarian in the sense that they do not make people marc rich and march in parades and they have abandoned ideology of making people repeat what they do not believe in. the pressures they put on people are in that sense less. it is more subtle.
you can talk about corruption, but maybe not criticize the party directly. there are unwritten will hear -- unwritten rules of speech. i would say what the chinese will have to be careful of is the moment when the basis of their legitimacy begins to deteriorate. right now, they argue it has the right to stay in power because it is bringing fast growth. can the people at the top are specially trained. as growth falls and as it becomes clear some of those people are the children of important people and they are not such wonderful --
>> your husband is a foreign minister of poland. you live part of the time in london. what was the difference between the life of people living in poland and the people who live in the united states. freedom, openness, democracy? >> nothing of significance. people in the united states are wealthier generally, but in terms of civic freedom and political freedom, i do not think there is any significant difference. >> what about the overall network, the social network, how well they take care of people there vs here? >> you are not comparing apples with apples. it depends where and which state and who you are talking about in the united states. poland is much smaller. in this country, symbols of five
-- civil society is far more developed and richer in the range of charities and institutions we have here. for the region, poland has a very developed society. the next day, people started organizing private kindergartens because there were people who were ready to do stuff right away. poland does have some of that. you do not have the depth of it. you do have state health care in poland and it varies. >> does it work? >> sometimes. it depends on how sick you are. >> cost of living? >> it is lower. again, salaries are lower, too.
>> in the back of your book, you go down the list of people who supported you in this project. how did this happen? the smith richardson foundation. paul gregory. how do you get support for something like this? >> i write letters and ask. >> what do they want? >> it is a formal application process. you fill it out, apply, and get references. i am one of many hundreds of grantees. >> how much time does it take you to get this support? >> it depends. i described you my intense relationship with my two translators. i could not have paid for them without support from a range of institutions. >> who would read this and make
it -- >> i want people who are interested in the people of europe who do not know anything about this region. i would be most happy if people who read it do not know anything about poland or communism or russia. people who are new to the subject. if teenagers read it, people in a 20's, i will be happy. >> what is the difference between being a marxist and a stalinist? >> marxism describes a philosophy, a very complex and deep philosophy. being a stalinist implies something more political. a follower of stalin. that is the narrower term.
>> what is italian fascism vs german fascism? >> they have similar routes. the word "to a tartarian -- "totalitarian," everything was in the state and nothing was out of the state. that was why it appears in this book. i introduced the book by speaking about totalitarianism. where does the idea come from? what are the intellectual origins of the word? >> what is next? >> many things. i would love to write a book about 1989. why it all fell apart. i would like to write a book about ukrainian famine. >> how long do you intend to live in europe?
>> there is no end date. it is an investment. >> how often do you write for the washington post? >> every other week. >> what do they want you to do? >> what i usually want to do is described some perspective on international and american affairs from a different view. i live outside the united states. i might see foreign policy, i might see american policy from a different angle. that is what i can do on that page that others cannot. >> your kids are going to do what? >> it is not a good moment to go into journalism. they are both bilinguals. one may go a different way. >> the name of the book is "iron
curtain: the crushing of eastern europe. our guest is anne applebaum. thank you. >> thank you. >> for a dvd copy of this program call 1-877-662-7726. for free transcripts or to give us your comments about this program, visit us at www.q-and- a.org. "q&a" programs are also available as c-span podcasts. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012] >> if you work for him, you would get a generous, sometimes overbearing, sometimes crude lost.
-- kroll boss -- a couple -- a cruel boss. he had a way of turning the tables. his version of an apology would be to say, i am a kind man and you are doing a good job. the issue was never settled. he always had to get the last word. one night, going through, a german bomb fell. he was pushed into a doorway. a couple of men were wounded. virgil did not like to be touched. he said, thompson, do not do that. thompson said, you should not be out here. it is dangerous.
>> next sunday, and extended 90- minute "q&a" with paul reid. >> tomorrow on "washington journal," how potential spending cuts could impact federal workers. james previews the electoral college voting process. david explains the department of homeland's security program that gives money to states to prevent, respond to, and recovering from a terrorist incident. >> david cameron took questions
this week on unemployment numbers, spending cuts, immigration, renewable energy, and his upcoming meeting. this portion is about 20 minutes. >> mr. speaker, the government's proposal came the voice with article 29. does the government propose the repeal of magna card? >> we do not intend that. i am sure he would understand i would like to learn about 1297 from the prime minister. the point we are making is the a stet the extent has massively increased -- the extent has massively increased. i think we can maintain access to justice but speed up the
wheels of government a little. >> will the prime minister answer the question asked many times by my friend a few moments ago? will he confirm the majority of households will be hit by accountability and tax credit? >> the point i made is bigger. everyone on working tax credits will be affected. we have to control welfare to deal with the massive deficit. there is a choice in politics here you can either control welfare, or you can say, no to the control of welfare, borrow, spend, and build up our deficit. >> the liaison committee yesterday, the prime minister
began by saying the government would except crucial members to make the justice and security bills acceptable on secret course. by the end of the session, by appearing to say he would not. would you clarify which one? >> cahill what i said clearly to the committee yesterday is we want this bill passed through parliament after having listened to all of the points made in the house of laws. i am sure we will been listening even more carefully. these are oppositions catching the disease. we will listen very carefully. the fundamental choice is to make sure these proceedings are available to judges. it is judges that should make the decision.
>> of corporate technology, middle ages. >> we have set out a regime of subsidies that stretches right out to 2017 and beyond. that is why the capacity of this country has doubled over the last two years. >> would you agree not only has this government had to deal with a catastrophic budget deficit, but we -- which we inherited from the former prime minister, but, also, a tidal wave of immigration deliberately fostered by the labor government? they are concentrating on the most important issues facing
this government? >> that is an important point. immigration was out of control under the last government. net migration ran over 200,000 a year. 2 million across a decade. under the sensible controls we put in place, immigration has fallen by a quarter in recent years. what is interesting is you can have proper control of immigration while also sank to the world our universities are open to foreign students to study here and as long as they have an english language qualification and a degree, there is no limit on the numbers that can come. that is our policy, controlling immigration and making sure the best and brightest come to britain. >> iceland has huge economic difficulties and rejected austerity. unemployment is 2.4% more than the u.k.
will the prime minister be gracious enough to congratulate iceland on working hard? >> if the case for an independent scotland is make us more like iceland, i am not sure i would -- that would totally recommend itself to the voters. i have a very good relations and i will make sure that remains the case. >> can i welcome the unemployment, where unemployment has fallen steadily, i urge the prime minister -- steadily. >> i am grateful for the point.
we will continue for the use contract, and worked experience. what we are seeing is large numbers of people who go into work experience come off benefits, by a job, and find it is a good start to a career and a working career. that is what we want to see. i thank you. unemployment in scotland [indiscernible] is the prime minister as shocked as i am that some managers were encouraging employers to go into unpaid walk-in experience placements? will the prime minister condemn this practice immediately? >> an important point. we want work experience places to the additional places, encouraging more young people to get at least a feel for work so they have a chance to get a job.
it is good he welcomes the fact that employment in scotland is up since the election. unemployment in scotland has fallen by 19,000 this quarter. we are making progress. >> mr. speaker. would the prime minister join me in welcoming the progress that is being made around the country since the ought to as an act of 2009, -- autism act of 2009? will he join me in encouraging his colleagues and local authorities across the country to decelerate this progress next year when the strategy is due to be reviewed? >> may i pay tribute to my friend who was instrumental in getting the autism act onto the book. the impact continues right up to this day and beyond. the one all adults living with
autism to live a 40 lives in a society that accepts them. i will make sure it is dealt with in a proper and coordinated way. >> the investment bank was due to be given new borrowing powers in three years. due to the failure to meet the target, because it was predicated on meeting the target set by the government, is the prime minister still committed to giving borrowing powers to the investment bank and if so, when. ? >> this government has set up a green investment bank in two years. the second point i would make its even at a time of fiscal difficulty, because of the mess we were left, we put 3 billion
pounds of money into this. it does not need to borrow because it has the money to invest. what is needed is that equity risk finances. >> by honorable friend goes to a summit tomorrow. has he noted the federalization of europe? the parliament and only it is insuring democratic for the you? does he agree with this? >> i do agree with my honorable friend on this one. it is the national parliament that provides the real democratic legitimacy within the european union when we are discussing a banking union, it
is to this house that represents our task appears that we should account. i bear that in mind when i am negotiating. >> can the prime minister confirm the statement reveals the government is now borrowing 212 billion pounds more than it previously planned to? >> i would take this with her plans were not to borrow even more. he was desperately disappointed predicted orlin would come down this year. that is a fact. >> the prime minister has rightly said we are locked in a global economic race. does he share my concern that having the highest aviation taxes in the world makes it harder for a business to compete and he increases the
cost of living? let me ask the treasury to conduct a full review of whether it costs more than it brings in. gus i understand the point -- >> i understand the point. we do not have any plans to commission a further response that this white -- at this point. despite the challenges, we have limited the rise to inflation over the time of 2011 to 2012. they have only increased by town. i bear in mind what he says. >> can the prime minister confirm it will be published soon? could he tell the house whether
he really believes this policies will increase or reduce child policy -- poverty? >> we want to see a lasting reduction. i think we need to have policies that address not only whether people are just above or just below the poverty line, but policies that actually address the cause of the poverty. what is it that traps people in poverty? not enough jobs. it todaywe need to look at all e things that trap people under poverty. >> plymouth as a global leader in marine science and engineering research. i very much welcome the initiative by the government to spend more money, but what my
friend the willing to meet with me to discuss how plymouth might become involved in the broadbent initiative -- broadband initiative? >> i am happy to meet with him. i know he stands up strongly for plymouth. we made the decision back at the start of the government to freeze the budget rather than cut it as so many other but his work. i am sure that was the right answer. we have that money back into the budget since then. i will look carefully what he says about the city broadband. we are working very hard to make sure all the plants are on track to deliver the superfast brought than that is important for
cities and rural areas >. >> a serious threat proposed to democracy. the police have stated there is evidence of willis involvement. -- loyalist involvement. i take this opportunity to condemn this assault on democracy. will he agree to meet with me to discuss the security situation? >> i join her in condemning the violence we have seen. in no way are the people being loyal or standing up for britishness. by
linda is unjustified. i agree completely. we should pay tribute again to the work the police to all of our behalf. i am always happy to meet -- meet and talk. >> will my honorable friends join me in congratulating my tto young entrepreneurs who have taken the initiative? does the prime minister agree this is just the sort of the this initiative we need to see? -- business initiative we need to see? >> i am looking forward to taking some data.
[laughter] i probably shouldn't for my weight. the greater start up of new businesses in this country is at a record high. we need a rebalancing between the public and private sectors. we need this on juvenile or -- this of sonora -- this offer on super norris -- this offer ship.trepreneurs 1%.put a cap on b above all, on this issue, what i
think is the right thing to do is to cut taxes the people in work rather than take more in taxes and the distributed -- read distribute it -- re distribute it. >> it cannot be fair. [indiscernible] >> i think my honorable friend puts it court -- put it clearly. many people have seen a pay freeze year after year and welfare benefits have gone up. we face a choice. do we go on putting those welfare benefits up, which is not helping those people who are in work, or do we take -- make
the tough decisions? the only welfare labour who anyone took seriously said their approach is not serious. he is right. >> thank you. may i congratulate the prime minister and the u.k. government of following the lead of this college -- scottish government in introducing equal marriage, minimum pricing for alcohol, and, previously, on the smoking ban. will he follow in the lead of the scottish got -- scottish government? >> because of the measures taken, there is an extra 300 million pounds with the scottish government to spend. i am happy to say when good
policies are introduced, des moines i think we all have the opportunity to follow them. >> you have been watching " question time." watch any time at c-span.org. >> tomorrow, a discussion about the implementation of the e-gov act. we will have that live at 9:00 a.m. eastern on c-span 3. >> clashes continue as the country holds a national referendum.
a look at these developments tomorrow. speakers include a former adviser to the palestinians. that is live at 10:30 a.m. eastern ad -- on c-span 2. >> the challenge is we want to be on every device for every person every hour of the day. we are a mobile society. the challenge is to make sure we path, as well as traditional viewing in the living room. the other challenge we have is the spectrum is a finite resource and others want that resource. there is not enough spectrum in
the universe to do all the video by broadband. our architecture of one to everyone in a location versus theirs, which is one to one, either system will always fail because it is a congestion of transmitting video 121. you cannot do that. 8:00 eastern on c-span 2. >> president obama spoke at a service in connecticut. the remarks are about 15 minutes. [applause]
>> scripture tells to not lose heart. inwardly, we are being renewed day by day. momentary troubles are achieving as a further blow with a further glory that far outweighs the moment. we fix our eyes not on what is seen but on what is not seen. what is seen as temporary but what is not seen is eternal. for we know the earthly tents we live in are destroyed and then we have a building with god, and internal house in heaven, not built by human hands. we gather here in memory of 20 beautiful children and six remarkable adults. they lost their lives in a school that could have been any school in a quiet town full of good and decent people. it could be any town in america. if you are a new town, i come to offer the love and prayers of a nation.
i am very mindful that mere words cannot match the deaths of your sorrow, nor can they heal your wounded hearts. i can only hope it helps for you to know that you are not alone in your grief. our world has been torn apart. all across this land of ours, we have wept with you. we pulled our children tight. you must know that whatever measure of comfort we could provide, we will provide. whatever portion of sadness we can share with you to ease this heavy load, we will gladly bear it.
you are not alone. as these difficult days have unfolded, you have also inspired us. stories of strength, resolve, and sacrifice. we know when danger arrived in the halls of the elementary school, the staff did not flinch, they did not hesitate. don and mary sprung, vicky, lauren, rachel, and anne marie. they responded as we all hope we might respond in such terrifying circumstances. with courage and with love. giving their lives to protect children in their care. we know there were other teachers who barricaded themselves inside classrooms and kept steady through it all and reassure their students by saying, wait for the good guys, they are coming.
you cared for one another. you have love one another. -- loved one another. this is how new town will be remembered. with time and god's grace, that love will see you through. we as a nation are left with hard questions. wsomeone once described the joy and the zaidi of km. -- of parenthood. with their first cry, this most precious, a vital part of ourselves, our child, is
suddenly exposed to the world, to possible mishap or malice. every parent knows there is nothing we will not do to shield our children from harm. we also know with that child's very first step and each after that, they are separating from us. that we cannot always be there for them. they will suffer sickness, setbacks, and broken hearts, and disappointments. we learn that our most important job is to give them what they need to become self-reliant, capable, resilient, ready to
face the world without fear. we cannot do this by ourselves. you realize no matter how much you love these kids, you cannot do it by yourself. this job of keeping our children safe and teaching them well is something we can only do together. with the help of friends and neighbors, the help of a community, and the help of a nation. . we come to realize we bear a responsibility for every child because we are counting on everybody else to help look for ours -- look after hours. we are all parents. they are all our children.
this is our first task caring for our children. it is our first job. if we do not get that right, we do not get anything right. that is how as a society we will be judged. by that measure, can we truly say as a nation that we are meeting our obligations? can we honestly say that we are doing enough to keep our children safe from harm? can we claim, as a nation, that we are all together there, letting them know they are loved and teaching them to love in return. can we say we are truly doing
enough to give all of the children in this country the chance they deserve to live out their lives and happiness? i have been reflecting on this for the past few days and the answer is no. we are not doing enough. we will have to change. since i have been president, this is the fourth time we have come together to comfort a grieving community torn apart by mass shootings. the fourth time we have hope survivors, the fourth time we have consoled the families of victims. in between, there has been an endless series of deadly shootings across the country, almost daily reports of
victims, some of them children. victims who, much of the time, their only fault was being at the wrong place at the wrong time. we cannot tolerate this any more. these tragedies must end. to end them, we must change. we will be told the causes of such filings are complex and that is true. -- violence are complex and that is true. no set of laws will eliminate evil from the world or every senseless act of violence from our society. that cannot be an excuse for inaction. surely we can do better than this. if there is even one step we can
take to save another child or another parent or another town from the grief that has visited tucson, all right, oak creek, newtown, and communities from columbine -- like columbine, then we have an obligation to try. in the coming weeks, i will use whatever power this office holds to engage my fellow citizens in an effort to prevent more tragedies like this. what choice do we have? we cannot accept events like this as routine. are we really prepared to say we are powerless in the face of
such carnage? that the politics are too hard? are we prepared to say such violence visited upon our children year after year is the price of our freedom? , soll the world's religions many of them represented here today, they start with a simple question. why are we here? what gives our life meeting? what gives our acts purpose? we know our time on this earth is fleeting.
we know we will each have our share of pleasure and pain. even after we chase after some earthly goal, we will fall short of what we hoped. we know no matter how good our intentions, we will all stumbles sometimes, in some way. we will make mistakes. we will experience hardships. even when we are trying to do the right thing, we know much of our time will be spent groping through the darkness, so often on able to discern god's heavenly plans. there is only one thing we can be sure of. that is the love that we have. for our children, for our families, for each other.
the warmth of a small child's embrace. that is true. the memories we have of them, the joy that they bring. , the wonder we see through their eyes, that fierce and boundless love we feel for them. a love that takes us out of ourselves, confines us to something larger. we know that is what matters. we know we are always doing right when we are taking care of them. , when we are teaching them well, when we are showing acts of kindness. we do not go wrong when we do that. that is what we can be sure of.
that is what you, the people of newtown, have reminded us. that is how you have inspired us. you remind us what matters. that is what should drive us forward in everything we do for as long as god sees fit to keep us on this earth. let the little children come to me, jesus said, and do not hinder them, for two such belongs the kingdom of heaven -- to such blongs the kingdom of heaven. charlotte, daniel, a libya, josephine, and the, dillon, -- anna, dylan, madeline,
catherine, chase, jesse, james, grace, family, -- emily, jack, noah, caroline, jessica, benjamin, allison. god has called them all home. for those of us who remain, let us find the strength to carry on and make our country worthy of their memory. may god bless and keep those we have lost in his heavenly place. may he grace those we still have with his holy comforter. may he less and watch this